Save
Copy
Add to Collection
Export to Google Docs
ShareVerse 19 below is the source text for Bal Tashchit, commonly used as a basis for sustainability values in the Torah. Less used is the subsequent verse (20) which indicates that trees ought to be cut down.
(יט) כִּֽי־תָצ֣וּר אֶל־עִיר֩ יָמִ֨ים רַבִּ֜ים לְֽהִלָּחֵ֧ם עָלֶ֣יהָ לְתׇפְשָׂ֗הּ לֹֽא־תַשְׁחִ֤ית אֶת־עֵצָהּ֙ לִנְדֹּ֤חַ עָלָיו֙ גַּרְזֶ֔ן כִּ֚י מִמֶּ֣נּוּ תֹאכֵ֔ל וְאֹת֖וֹ לֹ֣א תִכְרֹ֑ת כִּ֤י הָֽאָדָם֙ עֵ֣ץ הַשָּׂדֶ֔ה לָבֹ֥א מִפָּנֶ֖יךָ בַּמָּצֽוֹר׃ (כ) רַ֞ק עֵ֣ץ אֲשֶׁר־תֵּדַ֗ע כִּֽי־לֹא־עֵ֤ץ מַאֲכָל֙ ה֔וּא אֹת֥וֹ תַשְׁחִ֖ית וְכָרָ֑תָּ וּבָנִ֣יתָ מָצ֗וֹר עַל־הָעִיר֙ אֲשֶׁר־הִ֨וא עֹשָׂ֧ה עִמְּךָ֛ מִלְחָמָ֖ה עַ֥ד רִדְתָּֽהּ׃ {פ}
(19) When in your war against a city you have to besiege it a long time in order to capture it, do not destroy its trees, wielding the ax against them. You may eat of them, but you must not cut them down. Are trees of the field human to withdraw before you into the besieged city? (20) Only trees that you know do not yield food may be destroyed; you may cut them down for constructing siegeworks against the city that is waging war on you, until it has been reduced.
תניא נמי הכי (דברים כ, כ) רק עץ אשר תדע זה אילן מאכל כי לא עץ מאכל הוא זה אילן סרק. וכי מאחר שסופו לרבות כל דבר מה ת"ל כי לא עץ מאכל להקדים סרק למאכל
This halakha is also taught in a baraita (incoming rabbinic hermeneutics):
“Only the trees of which you know” (Deuteronomy 20:20); this is referring to a tree that bears fruit used for food, and it is permitted to cut down this type of tree under certain circumstances.
“That they are not trees for food”; this is referring to a barren tree.
The Gemara asks: And since the baraita will ultimately include all types of trees, so that even a tree that produces fruit may be cut down, what, then, is the meaning when the verse states: “That they are not trees for food,” which indicates that it is permitted to cut down only a barren tree?
The Gemara answers: It is to give precedence to cutting down a barren tree over a tree whose fruit is used for food.
וְאָמַר רַב פָּפָּא: הַאי מַאן דְּאֶפְשָׁר לְמִישְׁתֵּי שִׁיכְרָא וְשָׁתֵי חַמְרָא — עוֹבֵר מִשּׁוּם ״בַּל תַּשְׁחִית״. וְלָאו מִילְּתָא הִיא — ״בַּל תַּשְׁחִית״ דְּגוּפָא עֲדִיף.
And Rav Pappa said: One who is able to drink beer and nevertheless drinks wine violates the prohibition against wanton destruction.
The Gemara comments: And this is not a correct matter, as the prohibition against destruction of one’s body takes precedence. It is preferable for one to care for his body by eating higher quality food than to conserve his money.
(ב) שרש המצוה ידוע, שהוא כדי ללמד נפשנו לאהב הטוב והתועלת ולהדבק בו, ומתוך כך תדבק בנו הטובה, ונרחיק מכל דבר רע ומכל דבר השחתה, וזהו דרך החסידים ואנשי מעשה אוהבים שלום ושמחים בטוב הבריות ומקרבים אותן לתורה, ולא יאבדו אפילו גרגיר של חרדל בעולם, ויצר עליהם בכל אבדון והשחתה שיראו, ואם יוכלו להציל יצילו כל דבר מהשחית בכל כחם, ולא כן הרשעים אחיהם של מזיקים שמחים בהשחתת עולם, והמה משחיתים את עצמם... זה ידוע ומפרסם.
(ג) ...אבל ודאי מתר לקץ אם ימצא בדבר תועלת, כגון שיהיו דמי אותו העץ יקרים וזה רצה למכרו...
(2) The root of this commandment is well-known - it is in order to teach our souls to love good and benefit and to cling to it. And through this, good clings to us and we will distance [ourselves] from all bad and destructive things. And this is the way of the pious and people of [proper] action - they love peace and are happy for the good of the creatures and bring them close to Torah, and they do not destroy even a grain of mustard in the world. And they are distressed by all loss and destruction that they see; and if they can prevent it, they will prevent any destruction with all of their strength. But not so are the wicked - the brothers of the destructive spirits. They rejoice in the destruction of the world, and they destroy themselves... This is well known.
(3) ...But it is certainly permitted to cut [them] if he finds a beneficial matter in it, such as the value of the wood become valuable and he wants to sell it...
Ma’asei Yadai L’hitpa-er: On the Mitzvah of Sustainability
Rabbi Nina Beth Cardin, Rabbi Avram Israel Reisner
CJLS
Humanity no longer lives in the era of Genesis One. We abide in the era of Genesis Two. We must come to terms with the geophysical powers we wield and must develop an ethic that can honor, restrain and guide those powers so we and future generations can live in a thriving world.
Jed O. Kaplan, Kristen M. Krumhardt, Niklaus Zimmermann
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2009.09.028
At the beginning of our time domain, our model calculated significant amounts of forest clearance by 1000 BC in the Near East regions of Iraq, Syria-Lebanon, and Palestine-Jordan, all of which lie within the areas of the earliest known permanent agricultural societies, where farming and animal domestication originated more than 6000 years earlier (Ammerman and Cavalli-Sforza, 1971; Cavalli-Sforza, 1996; Bar-Yosef, 1998; Diamond, 2002). Ancient civilizations in this area were larger than in other regions during this time due to the increased food supply from well-established agricultural practices.
Shimshon Ben-Yehoshua, Carole Borowitz, Lumír Hanuš
Horticultural Reviews, Volume 39, 1-76 (2011)
Balm of Gilead, known also as the Judaean balsam, grew only around the Dead Sea Basin in antiquity and achieved fame by its highly reputed aroma and medical properties but has been extinct in this area for many centuries.
....
[The secret of Balm] Thus, we conclude that the Judean farmers solved this injury problem by developing a special tool kit from glass, stone, and bone to perform harvest operations on the bush.... Keeping secret the production of the balm of Gilead must have been a major factor in sustaining the economy and thus the survival of ‘‘a very large Jewish village...
....
The Jewish revolt and the subsequent conquest of Judea by the Roman legions under Vespasian and his son Titus marked a traumatic period that affected the production of balm of Gilead. According to Pliny, during the revolt, the Jews tried to destroy the trees in order to hurt Roman economic interests. The Jews vented their rage upon this shrub just as they were in the habit of doing against their own lives and persons, while the Romans protected it (Pliny, Book 12,Chapter54), resulting in conflict in defense of a shrub.
